tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 15 19:12:18 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Complex Sentences

In a message dated 2/12/1999 10:25:35 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

<<  (1) For verbs with an inherent locative concept, {-Daq} may or may not be
 > added to the OBJECT noun, which is the destination.
 > (2) When {-Daq} is used on an OBLIQUE noun in a sentence with a verb with
 > inherent locative concept, it means that the action of the verb takes place
 > AT that noun.  The noun is not the destination of the action. >>

Canon Call:

I need to know which verbs take {-Daq} for sure and which ones may not take
{-Daq}.  I would think that {qet} and {chegh} do not need to take {-Daq} when
referring to a destination.  Yet, I have seen discussion regarding {paw}
claiming that one actually "arrives" AT the location, thus requiring the
locative construction.

This disambiguates {juHDaq qet loD} from charghwI' and {juH qet loD} from
It is true:  I have never liked using {-Daq} for "to [someplace]."  I have
always felt it works for "at."


Back to archive top level